Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Beyond No: Quantifying AI Over-Refusal and Emotional Attachment Boundaries

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.14975 v1 pith:6Q7HWSVX submitted 2025-02-20 cs.CL cs.AI

Beyond No: Quantifying AI Over-Refusal and Emotional Attachment Boundaries

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords emotionalresponsesacrossanalysisboundaryaveragebenchmarkboundaries
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We present an open-source benchmark and evaluation framework for assessing emotional boundary handling in Large Language Models (LLMs). Using a dataset of 1156 prompts across six languages, we evaluated three leading LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude-3.5 Sonnet, and Mistral-large) on their ability to maintain appropriate emotional boundaries through pattern-matched response analysis. Our framework quantifies responses across seven key patterns: direct refusal, apology, explanation, deflection, acknowledgment, boundary setting, and emotional awareness. Results demonstrate significant variation in boundary-handling approaches, with Claude-3.5 achieving the highest overall score (8.69/10) and producing longer, more nuanced responses (86.51 words on average). We identified a substantial performance gap between English (average score 25.62) and non-English interactions (< 0.22), with English responses showing markedly higher refusal rates (43.20% vs. < 1% for non-English). Pattern analysis revealed model-specific strategies, such as Mistral's preference for deflection (4.2%) and consistently low empathy scores across all models (< 0.06). Limitations include potential oversimplification through pattern matching, lack of contextual understanding in response analysis, and binary classification of complex emotional responses. Future work should explore more nuanced scoring methods, expand language coverage, and investigate cultural variations in emotional boundary expectations. Our benchmark and methodology provide a foundation for systematic evaluation of LLM emotional intelligence and boundary-setting capabilities.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Beyond Compliance: How AI Could Help Creative Writers by Refusing Them

    cs.HC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A qualitative study with 22 creative writers finds that the reflective value of AI refusals depends on alignment with users' situational thinking phases, cognitive beliefs, and views of AI roles.